For years now, automakers have been trying to solve the puzzle of a hybrid pickup truck with little success. Hybrid pickups have been expensive to purchase compared to non-hybrid models, and they lacked a measurable gain in fuel economy, which caused consumers to pass on them. But what about a nontraditional pickup truck? Could a Honda Ridgeline equipped with an in-house hybrid system be a success?

At first glance, a hybrid pickup doesn't make a lot of sense for traditional pickup buyers. For starters, hybrid powertrains use an electric battery pack and a small-displacement engine, which get depleted quickly under load when towing or hauling. And, as mentioned, they typically cost more than traditional gasoline powertrains and offer only marginal improvements in fuel economy.

Here's an example: Chevrolet offered a mild-hybrid system in the 2016 Silverado 1500 in California via its eAssist technology. This truck improved city/combined fuel economy by 2 and 1 mpg, respectively; the option cost an extra $500 without sacrificing any of the truck's capability. Sure, this sounded good, but Chevy expected this to be a low-volume experiment since it built only about 500; it has since expanded its plans to offer model-year 2017 Silverado 1500s with eAssist across the U.S., however. Earlier this year Ford announced it will offer a hybrid version of the F-150, promising it will be available within five years. We'll be watching this development.

A Different Truckmaker

Honda is not like other truckmakers. The Ridgeline stands out among its peers as being, to put it bluntly, the "non-macho" version of a pickup. It doesn't brag endlessly about towing, hauling or torque numbers. Instead, it offers the versatility of a pickup bed — rated to carry 1,584 pounds (an RT all-wheel drive) and tow a 5,0000-pound trailer (AWD) — with the smooth ride of an SUV packaged with features such as a dual-action tailgate, in-bed audio, a multi-terrain system and hidden bed storage. The Ridgeline gets decent fuel economy with its front-wheel-drive models, returning an EPA-estimated 19/26/22 mpg city/highway/combined when equipped with the 3.5-liter V-6 engine.

This got us thinking ... could this kind of pickup offer a true hybrid powertrain and be the first dual-powertrain success in the mid-size pickup class? In other words, are consumer expectations for the Ridgeline different enough that a hybrid version could become a sales success?

We think this could be a good strategy since Honda already has the powertrain available. Acura, Honda's luxury brand, introduced a hybrid powertrain into its SUV lineup in the form of the 2017 Acura MDX Sport Hybrid. It is the brand's first hybrid SUV; the powertrain was developed for the RLX sedan and used in the NSX supercar as well. It just makes sense that with this hybrid powertain's use in a sedan, supercar and SUV, Honda should be able to use it in the Ridgeline at a reasonable cost.

The MDX Sport Hybrid powertrain — available in AWD only — returns 31 horsepower more than the MDX V-6 gasoline version and improves the fuel economy to 26/27/27 mpg city/highway/combined. That's an increase of 8 mpg city, 1 mpg highway and 6 mpg combined over the AWD gasoline engine. This improvement comes with a $3,500 surcharge over the gasoline MDX with FWD. But we see the same cost differences between gasoline and diesel pickups. The Chevrolet Colorado serves as a case in point: Moving from the gas V-6 to the inline-four-cylinder diesel costs almost an additional $3,500. Imagine this new more powerful and efficient powertrain in the Ridgeline, which has a curb weight almost identical to the MDX.

Using the fuel-economy increases for the MDX Hybrid, a hybrid Ridgeline could easily deliver 311 horsepower (up from 280) and have an EPA-estimated fuel economy of 27/27/28 mpg city/highway/combined.

If the MDX Hybrid improvements held true for a Ridgeline hybrid, it possibly could beat the current mid-size fuel-economy champ, the Chevrolet Colorado with the turbo-diesel 2.8-liter engine. In extended- or crew-cab models equipped with the six-speed automatic transmission, the Colorado returns 22/30/25 mpg city/highway/combined for roughly the same $3,500 difference between a FWD gas and AWD hybrid MDX.

Is It Feasible?

During a recent pickup event, a top-level Honda engineer said Honda could add the engine to the Ridgeline with relatively little investment in engineering. Since the hybrid is already used in-house by a similarly sized vehicle with an almost identical engine bay, the front of the pickup would not have to undergo a substantial change. Of course, placement of the hybrid system's battery pack and electric motor poses a challenge.

Be that as it may, a hybrid Ridgeline could be a perfect fit for Honda as it continues to expand its brand to reach new-truck owners. By offering a compact hybrid pickup, Honda could capture a market niche in which other truckmakers have failed to succeed.

Since Honda's core products are cars and SUVs, a hybrid Ridgeline wouldn't have to be a big seller for the company to be considered a true success. And it might just force other truckmakers to rethink their current or future hybrid pickup plans.

Editor's note: This story was updated Aug. 17, 2017, to reflect that Chevrolet Silverado 1500s with eAssist are sold in all 50 U.S. states.

Well, since you ask, every Ridgeline ever built---until just last year---was equipped with Honda's five speed automatic. Ten forward speeds would surely boost performance but the current six speed has only been around for a short while in their pickup.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 15, 2017 1:44:19 PM

I say no, quit pushing this garbage. Only people who don't actually drive trucks demand it for the rest of us who do.

Posted by: BD | Aug 15, 2017 2:19:50 PM

Only people who don't actually drive trucks demand it for the rest of us who do. Posted by: BD | Aug 15, 2017

@BD

You got that right!

Go to Washington DC sometimes and all the big shot politicians that want the rest of us saving gas, riding bicycles and taking the bus, while they do all of their personal travel in huge SUVs and fly in private jets.

It is not an accident that they act that way.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 15, 2017 2:50:25 PM

Would be better if it was similar to the Workhorse W-15 where a smaller engine provides on demand electricity to an electrical powertrain (in my humble opinion, of course). And better still, package it in a way that the gas engine can be replaced in the future with more batteries or another electricity-generating source.

Build it and see if people will take to it. I am not a fan of the styling, but some of the features seem useful for a suburban homeowner. Those needing more towing/hauling/cred will clearly gravitate to something else.

Posted by: djjr50 | Aug 15, 2017 3:16:41 PM

Honda is serious about building a hybrid Ridgeline, and they'd like to have it available by 2019. I suspect the holdup is in towing, as the MDX is not rated for towing. They would obviously want the Ridgeline to have towing capability.

As for the ten-speed, they are tweaking it to make sure it works perfectly with the iVTM-4 AWD system. The Ridgeline is already designed to accept it. We might see it in the AWD MDX or Pilot first.

Back to the hybrid....I'd like to see Honda incorporate some technology so that you can use the powertrain as a generator for power at a jobsite, camping, tailgating, or during power failure at home (the current 400W isn't enough). They already have the technology in their Clarity.

Posted by: Longboat | Aug 15, 2017 5:19:05 PM

this is the last hurrah for the Ridgeline.

It will be retired in a few years. The sales numbers just don't hold up. Have they ever sold more that 50k Ridgelines in a year?

Posted by: papajim | Aug 15, 2017 6:27:54 PM

" And experiment is what it turned out to be; model-year 2017 Silverado 1500s do not offer this option."

What!?! They expanded the experiment to Hawaii, Oregon, Texas and Washington for the 2017 model year. For 2018, they will be sold nationwide. That's a huge mistake. And they aren't mild hybrids and haven't been called that since pre-bankruptcy GM.

Posted by: KeepRight | Aug 15, 2017 6:28:25 PM

If the improvement in mileage is real, that's substantial for city driving. So if I were to buy a midsize truck, I would seriously consider the option. Also, considering that solid state batteries, which have the potential to out perform the lithium batteries of today, are on the horizon, the time may come for hybrid mid-size trucks.

Posted by: NoQDRTundra | Aug 15, 2017 7:26:45 PM

If Honda wants to build a hybrid they will. So far Honda is selling enough Ridgelines to justify making them in the same plant that they make Pilots in. I doubt the Ridgeline will ever beat its competitors in sales but as long as the Ridgeline maintains sales at a level they can make a profit and share a production line with an existing product. Most truck owners are not going to buy a Ridgeline, but then there are many other choices. Buy what you like and enjoy what you drive.

Posted by: Jeff S | Aug 15, 2017 7:46:33 PM

Honda is selling enough Ridgelines to justify making them in the same plant that they make Pilots in. Posted by: Jeff S | Aug 15, 2017

@Jeff S

Whatever that means??? Toyota sells almost as many Tacomas in a month as Honda has sold Ridgelines since January 1. Clearly they've bitten off more than they can chew. Honda built the Element and the S2000 and both are now in the museum of failed attempts. Ridgeline will soon join them.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 15, 2017 8:08:51 PM

@papa--I'd like to drive a hybrid pickup truck. I do eat kale and I have hugged a tree. But I'm not sure the hybrid is for me. I just want to drive a good-looking Honda with really great MPGs.

Posted by: Jeff S. | Aug 15, 2017 8:16:21 PM

I just want to drive a good-looking Honda with really great MPGs

@Jeff S

The 2017 Civic is just what the doctor ordered! The tow rating is a bit light and there's no chance of hauling plywood, but you'll love it for daily driving.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 15, 2017 8:47:01 PM

@papajim, @jeffs
So let it be written. So let it be done. Charleston Heston-Moses.
Kale and trees and retirement. Looking forward to all of that in my future. :-) Now you boys be nice to each other. I'll let you know when I see the first Model 3 on my peddle into work. Nothing yet.

Posted by: Angelo Pietroforte | Aug 15, 2017 8:52:30 PM

I would ask these truck companies what the hurdles are for an ice/electric powertrain.

Something about two or four electric motors, driven by the ice as a generator with a small battery for reserve would interest me. The performance should be impressive along with towing/off road possibilities would be very intriguing. Is weight the issue?

I would think if people put down huge money for things like raptors, a hybrid system with a high power spec and not neccesarily marketed at efficiency (result could very well be more efficient) would sell well.

Aluminum f-150's are more about higher payload and tow spec due to weight savings than clear gains in efficiency imo. Why no one is trying to market a locomotive type powertain surprises me.

Posted by: andrwken | Aug 15, 2017 10:19:52 PM

Papajim - - -

P: "This is the last hurrah for the Ridgeline.
It will be retired in a few years. The sales numbers just don't hold up. Have they ever sold more that 50k Ridgeline's in a year?"

"Last Hurrah"? Yes, but it may also be an act of desperation.

"Retired"? Probably, but who knows? Even bad cars can live too long. But the Ridgeline is not bad: it's just not a real truck. And the possible Hybrid Ridgeline is based on the false assumption that real truck owners care greatly about fuel mileage. News Flash: they don't --- not when gas is $2.80/gal.

"Sales numbers holding up?" Actually, they are holding down,--- and continually so. The slope of sales-vs-time in the 1st 6 months of 2017, is a NEGATIVE 39 units per month. Can't be happy for management.

"Sold more than 50K per years"? No.
They sold 23,667 units in all of 2016, their "re-introduction" year.
They have sold 21,182 through July of this year, which, if that rate were maintained (which it's not), would max out at 42,364 units for all of 2017.
The former model, in the years 2010 to 2014, averaged only about 25,000 units per year.

@papa jim--The Tacoma is a much different truck than the Ridgeline--it is like comparing apples to oranges. Also the Tacoma is not a completely new truck, it is basically over a decade old with a few face lifts. The Ridgeline appeals to the nontraditional truck buyer. A Ridgeline does not really appeal to me but I understand the appeal it has to those who would not normally buy a truck. If Honda loses money on the Ridgeline then it will eventually be discontinued, but I am not the customer it is targeted for. I also have little interest in the Tacoma which is outdated and pricey. The new Colorado and Canyon are a much more up to date midsize truck than the Tacoma and still have the appeal of a traditional truck without the full size. I am not going to judge the Ridgeline or the people that buy it. I will leave the judging up to you since you like to judge others.

Posted by: Jeff S | Aug 15, 2017 11:02:11 PM

I often wonder how much simpler a design a diesel-electric setup would be compared to these types of hybrid vehicles, how much better it might perform, the cost to buy and maintain, and whether or not it would be more efficient. I would say it would be worth it to try, but good luck getting manufacturers to care.

Posted by: BD | Aug 16, 2017 12:01:04 AM

A hybrid Ridgeline would definitely need to have the same tow capacity- buyers my not expect the same things from a Honda truck, towing a reasonable sized trailer has to be part of the picture.
The price premium isn't $3500 if that's the difference between a 2wd MDX and a Hybrid MDX- the upcharge includes the AWD system, so the difference from an MDX w SHAWD and tech package and the Sport Hybrid with the same is only $1500. Using EPA numbers and current prices, you save not quite $0.03 a mile. ROI is at 50,000mi. That isn't bad, as long as the battery holds up (and it should). Even with the modest miles I do now, that' would likely be before its paid off, so it directly lowers your cost of ownership. Win! The ROI calc would have to be reviewed with FE numbers for the 10spd auto, and fuel prices once/if it became available.

Posted by: Mr Knowitall | Aug 16, 2017 6:25:40 AM

Buy one now while they're still making 'em.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 16, 2017 7:09:10 AM

@PapaJim - your error is assuming that Honda will quit making the Ridgeline if it does not sell in greater numbers.

Consider these two alternatives:

1) Honda is selling Ridgelines as fast as it can ship them from the factory. They do not CURRENTLY have the capacity to meet demand.

2) As long as Honda makes sufficient profit per vehicle, it makes good business sense to keep producing them. It's not always about number of units sold, but profit per unit sold. That is key here - if you can wrap your mind around that concept, you'll have a much better understanding of their business plan.

Posted by: Longboat | Aug 16, 2017 8:39:27 AM

@longboat

I'm overlooking the tone of condescending reply.

If your above comments are true, why doesn't Honda still make the S2000? It was by far a better car than the Mazda Miata, but the Miata is still in production and the S2000 is finished.

The Honda Element was a brilliant, unique and ingenious car within its class and its poor sales figures doomed it to Honda hell. You can be sure these cars could be produced at a profit, but Honda dealers were howling about having to keep a slow seller on their inventories.

My experience includes the production side, and the retail side of the auto industry---and of course as a consumer.

Tell us about your experience.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 16, 2017 9:07:24 AM

@PapaJim, i don't mean to sound condescending if that is the way you perceived it... it's just that some of your comments seemed to lack much forethought...and I sometimes get a bit abrupt in my responses to such.

On the S2000, sales were starting to drop, and the recession had hit, so Honda made the decision to cancel it. S2000s are still highly sought after. Honda may be bringing a version of it back into production next year for its 70th anniversary.

The Element....highly regarded by its owners, but it did not sell as well as Honda would have liked.....complete opposite of the Ridgeline.

As for.my exoerience.... let's just say that I pay attention, and I have no allegiances to any vehicle mfr.

Posted by: Longboat | Aug 16, 2017 9:35:11 AM

@longboat and papajim- Honda took a gamble on not differentiating the Gen2 Ridgeline from the Pilot unlike the 1st one. This means front end styling is weak to the average truck buyer, but Helps keep both engineering and production costs down. Its more like the ridgeline is variant of the Pilot, much like the Avalanche was of the Suburban. With fewer unique stampings and parts, the numbers to make it viable go way down. the engineering money has been spent. Now it's just a matter of building them through the model cycle.
MX5 vs S2000? Despite similarities, the two didn't directly compete. the S2000 was in a higher market segment. That segment is simply smaller, and eventually made the car non-viable.

Posted by: Mr Knowitall | Aug 16, 2017 10:02:33 AM

Volume selling is a critical part of modern automobile manufacturing.

If your billion dollar facility sells one dozen Ridgelines at a million dollar profit, you are still in the red.
,
The Ridgeline is on a path to join the Edsel, the S2000, the Vega, the Avalanche and the Element.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 16, 2017 10:28:20 AM

Last Hurrah? They cant build these things fast enough.

Its the perfect little pretend truck.

Its everything little pretend truck fan wants except for the tiny group that actually really does need real off road capability.

A Hybrid options makes this pretender even more attractive to the I think I need a truck crowd for the 364 days a year they aren't bringing anything home in the bed but can love the 40+MPG it would give.

Since its not body on frame the ridgeline isn't a truck. But the other little trucks aren't much of a truck other than being able to handle rough terrain. If you actually need to haul or tow you have a fullsize. If you care about the ride and daily driving you have a ridgeline. If you wanna look cool or are part of 1% that actually does offorad you got one of the other ones.

Posted by: Clint | Aug 16, 2017 11:23:24 AM

Papajim - - -

"Longboat" has been trying to rationalize and justify the Honda Ridgeline for some time, and on other websites, too.

As a real pickup, it doesn't work. The numbers aren't there. Overall sales volume is too low. The growth slope is downward. The robustness is questionable. It overheats under heavy load in slippery conditions. Off-road capabilities are meager. Cab is not separated from the not-replaceable box. It's too car-like. Ground clearance is too low for heavy snow states. Platform is predominately weak FWD. Towing is too low to be competitive. The price is too high (for what you get).

Look, if Honda were honest enough to label this product as an open-end or flat-bed Pilot, then we would not even be having this discussion. Everyone would say, "Great: a nice way to get fertilizer from Home Depot".

But to call this Ridgeline a "pickup truck", that's where the problem comes in. You should remember that in the 1930's and 1940's, pickup-like trunk-boxes were available for many sedans, but no one had the audacity to call that combination a "pickup truck"!

I'm still amazed that Honda management had the chance to build an all new truck from a clean sheet of paper and the Gen 2 Ridgeline is what we get.

They could have build a half ton pickup for the US market that used a small V8 and AWD. It would have been a hit with the Honda fans.

You have to admit their packaging and marketing have been clever but they missed the target badly. In fairness to Honda, the folks at Nissan built the truck more to my specs and it isn't selling either. Toyota sells a ton of Tacomas and cannot give Tundras away.

It's amazing that Ford and GM sell as many as they do, and that they command so. much brand loyalty year after year.

Go figure!

Posted by: papajim | Aug 16, 2017 12:27:57 PM

@ papajim. Where exactly would Honda have built this 1/2 ton truck with a V8? You seem to be stuck in the past. Honda build exactly what they targeted to build at a significantly low development cost. It has not payload than a RAM eco-diesel when comparing crew cab configuration. In one of your earlier posts you summoned that this should just not be built due to low sales. Do you work for Honda. Do you know what the amoritizized volume per year they targeted to be profitable. By your logic half of the GMC brand trucks / SUV's need to be killed off. Canyon specifically.

Posted by: Smokin' a 6.2 | Aug 16, 2017 12:41:04 PM

The hybrid system come from Acura it`s probably not designed for truck application. Who care the Ridgeline is not a truck

Posted by: JoBlow | Aug 16, 2017 12:47:53 PM

@NMGOM/Bernie, your post is full of errors. Everything you've said is rhetoric, with none of it based on facts. A lot (not all) of the stuff you said could have just as well been said about any pickup truck.

Not viable in snow states?!? There was a ROC member driving through 14" of snow last winter with the 2017 Ridgeline...he said it was "unstoppable". Couple that with the fact that you don't have to decide between 2wd (dangerous for you) and 4wd (dangerous for your "real" truck) when driving on patchy roads, and the Ridgeline is a clear winner in snow states. Sheesh, think it through, man!

Can't haul? It has more payload capacity than most mid-size trucks, and many full-size trucks. It also has more bed space than most mid-size quad-cab trucks. How many other mid-size trucks can tou drive a UTV into the bed? Yes, it has a shallow bed - makes it easy to reach stuff and improves visibility out the back window. If you can't figure out how to deal with shorter bed sides, please feel free to buy something else.

If you do technical off-roading, the Ridgeline is not for you. However, it handles fire trails and typical logging roads just fine, excels in the sand, and does great on trips through the pasture. It cannot do the same off-road stuff as a Tacoma, but will handle off-road better than many full-size trucks. I drive 3/4-ton trucks at work....they have 7 inches ground clearance under the differential, that's less than the Ridgeline.

They make hundreds of different versions of other trucks. You will find one in just about every category to beat the Ridgeline. The Ridgeline excels at doing many things well. Need more payload? Enjoy the rough ride when you select the max payliad package on your other truck. Need better MPG? Enjoy the leisurely performance. Need more performance? Enjoy the hit on MPG. Ridgeli e does it all well. Not the best in evry category, but generally second best in all categories. Few compromises like you find in the other trucks.

Call it what you want, and spread all the myths and rhetoric that you want. You cannot change facts.

Posted by: Longboat | Aug 16, 2017 12:53:22 PM

Volume is with half tons. Nissan and Toyota can't crack it. The mid-size is where the growth potential was until late, so Honda was smart to take another stab at the mid-size. Five manufacturers for half ton, only two until the twins came back around (not accounting for Ridgeline whose volume at that time was a pittance).

At the end of the day, the big three can throttle the mid-size market by how much money they throw on the hood of full-size. Not like most of this country has to maneuver around small European streets, but that is slowly changing in the major congested metropolitan areas where one day, it will no longer be cool to have a behemoth of a truck unless it is really a necessity. They sure know how to make pretty, glittery, and shiny full-sizers and get people to part with their hard earned money, otherwise they wouldn't do it.

Posted by: Angelo Pietroforte | Aug 16, 2017 1:06:03 PM

Agree Smokin why would Honda want to compete with a full size half ton V-8 powered truck--not Honda's thing and both Nissan and Toyota have their own full size half tons competing with Ford, Ram, and GM. The cost to develop the Ridgeline is much less since both the Pilot and Ridgeline share the same platform, many of the same parts, and the same assembly plant. The Ridgeline does a lot of things right for many suburbanites with families but it is not for everyone and the traditional truck owner is not the targeted market for Ridgeline. The Ridgeline is not my cup of tea but I full understand why it exists and who Honda is targeting with it. Not everyone has the same needs and wants in a vehicle.

Cheap gas is the future of trucks and autos for the next 15 years. America is a net exporter of fuel.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 16, 2017 6:55:15 PM

@ Papa. Your right Not A Honda thing. They have no body on frame body shops. The RL served is targeted buyer well, even if that is a small part of the market. As far as a V8, the GM mid twins could use a V8. They get smoked by the Honda V6. I figured GM would have learned how to make a decent V6 by tearing down the Honda V6's that used to go into the first gen Saturn Vues. Guess not.

Posted by: Smokin' a 6.2 | Aug 16, 2017 7:18:58 PM

@smokin

Gm's 4.3 v6 and the 3.6 engine are both perfectly good motors. It's important to understand that the trends of the last 40 years were driven by expensive gas. Today gas is dirt cheap and there's no reason it won't stay that way.

The value prop for smaller and cheaper cars has evaporated.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 16, 2017 7:30:01 PM

@ papa. I would say Honda would have to disagree about smaller cars. They are selling north of 30k every month 98% retail with little to no incentives. GM on the other hand, well...

Posted by: Smokin' a 6.2 | Aug 16, 2017 7:36:04 PM

@longboat

I've presented this before, but using the testing done here between the midsized and max tow challenges here, which uses similar methodology, the Ridgeline is hardly a standout. It does okay, well on paper in fact, against the midsizes, but it just isn't that great.
Compare a minivan to a SUV. One could argue that minivans are superior to SUVs, but they don't sell with the same volume. It doesn't make them bad, it just makes them unpopular.
Ridgeline production may be struggling to meet demand, but that demand pales to the competition, which again points back to the Ridgeline being a niche market. Which Honda FREELY admits. So you like Ridgelines, great!
But don't exaggerate. 14" of snow is above the bottom of the bumper. Anyone who has plowed snow will tell you that either it wasn't 14", or it wasn't very far. I towed a trailer out of a hunt camp, with a 4x4 truck that had lots of weight, great off-road tires, a locker front and rear, and was digging through a little more than 6" of snow outside Flagstaff on a graded forest road. It was a 6 mile trip and the odometer registered well over 15. I was in low range, and granny, clawing through snow, and my diffs are 9" over the ground so I wasn't plowing. My tires would climb up on the snow, spin and dig down to the ground and then move forward until it would climb up on the snow again. The Risgeline doesn't have enough tire to ride on the snow, and lets face it, without lots of momentum and a short distance, your story is false.
But back to the Hybrid. Honda absolutely should build a Hybrid Ridgeline. If they can make a turbo 4 Hybrid work, even better. I can only speculate, but my guess is the number of people who actually tow with a Ridgeline is even less than a Tacoma. But either way, a lower rating for a Hybrid isn't going to damage the brand.

Posted by: James | Aug 16, 2017 10:14:29 PM

@smokin

The GM 4.3 and 3.6 V6s are worlds apart.
The 4.3 is a more industrial oriented engine while the 3.6 has a wide powerband, is efficient, and adaptable.

The

Posted by: James | Aug 16, 2017 10:28:01 PM

...
The Honda V6 and the 3.6 are comparable, but the 3.6 has greater power under the curve and is more versatile.

Posted by: James | Aug 16, 2017 10:29:26 PM

@papa jim--So can you guarantee there will be cheap gas for 15 years or are you just mouthing off? Do you think the only reason that people buy a vehicle is because of cheap gas? I doubt most who would buy a Ridgeline are comparing mpgs with a Silverado, more like they prefer the Ridgeline. Not everyone thinks alike nor do they have the same tastes in vehicles, clothing, and food. Maybe if you left your retirement community in Florida you would see that. Also Smokin is correct that Honda is not chasing fleet sales nor is it putting large rebates to move the metal.

It appears that most of the manufacturers are still transitioning to turbo I-4s and V-6s despite the cheap gas. Many new car and truck buyers are not aware of what type of motor is under the hood and many don't even know where their vehicle is made. Does the vehicle have heated and cooled seats, adaptive cruise control, wi-fi, keyless entry and start, and a touch screen.? A few enthusiasts on car and truck sites are more interested in whether a car or truck has a V-8, but most of the rest of the population wouldn't know where the oil dipstick is or the washer fluid. Many would say that it is a new vehicle and that it requires no maintenance or the dealer will take care of all the maintenance.

Posted by: Jeff S | Aug 16, 2017 11:08:08 PM

@Jeff S. It sounds personal to you. Honda's pickup did not do well. Cheap fuel is back.

Texas alone has enough natural gas and shale to change the world's oil markets for decades. Today we have low inflation and low unemployment. GM and Ford can thrive selling big SUVs and Pickups in this environment. We will see about Honda.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 17, 2017 1:06:09 AM

@papa jim--So can you guarantee there will be cheap gas for 15 years or are you just mouthing off?

-----

Nobody is making any guarantee, but I recall that was you mouthing off to papa and I years when we told you we needed to drill here, drill now so we could pay less. Of course you said it would not work and got very elitest. Ecoboosts still need fuel.

Posted by: Dave | Aug 17, 2017 1:21:40 AM

@James, the ROC member who mentioned driving through the 14" of snow is a longtime and reputable member. I have no reason to doubt him. Snow compacts differently depending on how wet it is to begin with. I have driven through 6" snow in my Accord coupe. I know this because I got out several times and checked it....the top of my boots is six inches. I will caveat this with the fact that my Accord had snow tires, as did the ROC members 2017 Ridgeline.

You mentioned off-road tires. Most off-road tires do not do well in snow. Their tread is too aggressi e and does not pack the snow in sufficiently to enhance traction. You can verify this easily by reading up on snow vs off-road tires. In both of my scenarios, snow tires were used. Even if the 14" was mis-calculated, 12" is not unreasonable, depending on the type of snow.

A smart AWD does have an advantage over 4wd when it comes to traction. 4wd only has an advantage in very low-speed applications, and that is due to the transfer case, not the 4wd itself. The exception would be active lockers front and rear, but that is rare in an one vehicle (GM mid-size twins with ZR2 package are the only ones I can think of at the moment). A locker on a single axle may be equivalent to a typical modern AWD system.

Posted by: Longboat | Aug 17, 2017 6:42:26 AM

@Dave--I never said that. I am far from an elitist but how can anyone make a definitive statement that gas prices will be going down for the next 15 years without backing it up with facts. If anything gas prices have gone up in the last couple of months but having said that they are still not that bad. Dave I worked in the oil and gas industry for years so I do know something about it. Have you worked in the oil and gas industry? Gas prices will probably go down after the Summer driving season is over and then up again but I cannot definitively state that in 15 years they will go up or down.

@papa jim--I have no interest in the Ridgeline either way so I am not defending the Ridgeline or Honda. I don't have a dog in the fight but it appears you do since you are so concerned about any threat that could hurt GM especially the V-8 powered Silverado and Sierra. I gave you a link to a factual article on F-150 article about the decrease in sales of V-8s in F150s and you as usual go on the attack and do not back up your statements. Fox news is not going to cover trends in cars and trucks as well as a source directly involved in the auto industry. I have little interest in the trend toward turbo V-6s or turbo I-4s except concern about how those engines will hold up over the long run. I do read more than one source. Maybe the Honda will eventually discontinue the Ridgeline or maybe not. I do understand why it exists, which you fail to comprehend. Whether I like something or don't doesn't matter as to whether it succeeds or fails in the market place.

Posted by: Trucker | Aug 17, 2017 7:19:13 AM

@Trucker

Do some study on the oil shale and natural gas discovered in Texas during the last five years.

Enough shale/crude to last for decades, even centuries. Billions of barrels of crude. Enough natural gas to distill a global supply of methanol for decades.

America produces more fossil fuel than our country uses. We export the rest. Under these conditions I'm being very conservative to suggest a fifteen year horizon.

Please don't respond with some reply about local prices or short term price changes. I'm talking about a mega-trend in oil that can last for the next 15 years conservatively.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 17, 2017 7:27:30 AM

@papajim--Oil prices are not just based on the amount of resources available. How long did you work in the oil and gas industry? A global crisis can cause oil prices to go up. Also if oil goes below the cost to produce it then many small producers will go out of business or be acquired by larger competitors. I will agree that an increase in available supply will most likely stabilize oil prices but to state definitively that oil prices will go down over the next 15 years is like stating that the stock market will continually go up over the next 15 years--maybe it will and maybe it will not. A trend is a projection and can be most likely but there are many other factors that cannot be foreseen--wars, political unrest, and environmental laws that limit the use and production of ICE vehicles. You have to consider what you pay at the pump as well because it directly effects what you spend on other items which effects the economy. Increases in fuel taxes can effect the price of gas as well especially since many states have increased fuel prices to pay for road repair and building. Do I know for certain that fuel prices will go up? No I don't but then I don't know for certain they will go down either. If I knew for certain that prices would go down I would most likely sell off some of my oil stock because with cheaper oil prices oil companies could go down in value.